Well, I'm a physicist. But I'm not running.

At least you got the physical laws at your back. Can't be said for many politicians...

Oh, we redefine the laws of physics probably as often as politicians redefine the laws of men. :)

Actually that's true. How's it going with those gravity waves and the merging of quantum and einstein?
I need another comeback. :/

Ha ha ha!
I did at least. :)

I'll go from the bottom this time, as gnostic's longer reply is up top and will take me longer.

I was not joking about friends and acquaintances sometimes telling me I should go into politics. In your case I see it as half joking wink at me. And I appreciate that :)

But as a serious answer:
1 - I'm a foreigner in Poland. It's basically a non starter as I did not consider naturalization. Maybe that will change as more years pass...
2 - More importantly, my character is not actually very well suited to politics. I'm by nature skeptical and contrarian. If I wanted to be a politician: I would certainly not denounce mobbing, but join in. I would not try to point to both sides where they are wrong, but I would choose the most powerful one. And I most certainly would not care about trying to help others understand themselves better, but would just use those readings of others to manipulate them.

Basically I have a large character flaw: I care slightly more about my honor than my reputation - per the definitions I gave somewhere.


Come to think of it, in my corporate work life I play politics all the time. I have to. [Lie! I chose my career. I can quit anytime. Obviously in denial about myself. ;) Repress... repress...] I'm sure to some extent my GOG life is a compensation mechanism of sorts - also for the lack of substantial gaming time for years already, but I digress. What I mean is I have noticed a correlation between the times I choose to be high mindedly provocative here in the forums, and shitty periods at work where I am not very happy with myself.

Thanks for the compliment of sorts though. Assuming I did not misread your intent completely.

See above.

I can add that I went into the hard sciences partially due to a strong desire to understand the world. As I matured I realized the spheres of human action are equally if not more relevant. I have developed interests in history, economy, and psychology accordingly. Sociology I find almost hopeless methodologically, but that can be just my bias.

Your joking is contrary to the gravity of the situation.

...yes, I came back here just to make a stupid pun.
I regret nothing.

Thanks, with you I have no doubt about the intent. I'm sure you know I consider you a fellow humanitarian idealist. Cheers.

And boy, seeing how many posts while I wrote the above... now I'm a bit sorry to have interrupted the jovial banter.
I might have fucked up by mentioning I am one... :(
I'll correct for it by pointing Merkel is also AFAIK?

You do realize that as soon as the question about someone having anything to do with politics is raised the first thing most people think is "Liar!" and "Publicity!"?
I'll take your word for this but the thought still nags at me.

While I don't consider being called a politician a compliment, it's great that you're positive about it. I'm only joking, as always, and my intent isn't to insult you in any case. :D
But since I'm always joking, like I said, here's a snippet I liked from your wall of text, taken out of context:

It's why I like you.

Yes.

Indeed we do. You and me included right? Or is this a 2nd degree encounter? :) We are both imperfect humans.

More relevantly, even when no one is to blame - neither themselves nor others - we tend to attribute moral responsibility due to antropomorphic bias.

Let me ask this: do you see a logical possibility that my inaction AND Jane's action, both cause her harm? Both are necessary and not sufficient causes. Why do you see it as being an EITHER / OR situation?

Let's not talk about blame yet ok? Blame implies moral responsbility. For now let's talk causation only. We'll get to blame and morals soon enough as we clear the ground of semantic obstacles.

I'm also ignoring your other hypotheticals for now because I think they muddy the waters. Only for now... I have no problem coming back to them later.

And gnostic, if there is one thing I really respect in you, even more than your stoic ascetism, it's your willingness to question. Cheers.

To put it simply in a known term: Correlation does not imply causation.

Hush! I hear a thousand politician souls scream in pain.

Can't help it. I feel the need to simplify walls of text.